Dismissed

Ramvilas and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2023A482/9855/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 323 and 452 IPC, the court dismissed the quashing prayer as not pressed. However, the court directed that bail applications filed upon surrender within three weeks shall be considered expeditiously, without coercive action during this period.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quash dismissed; direction to decide bail expeditiously if surrender within three weeks; no coercive action till then.

Ramvilas and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9855 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Ramvilas And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Tripathi,Saurabh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants Ramvilas, Arjun, Pritam and Sudhir with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings as well as set aside the order dated 01.10.2022 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M, Kaimganj, Farrukhabad in Complaint Case No. 116/2021 (Chandra Sahai Vs. Ramvilas and others), under Sections 323, 452 I.P.C., pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M, Kaimganj, Farrukhabad and with a further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case, during the pendency of the present application.

¶8

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants states that the purpose of the applicants would suffice if an order is passed directing the trial court to decide the bail application of the applicants, as expeditiously as possible. He further states that although the prayer has been made for quashing and staying the further proceedings of the case but he does not press the same.

¶9

Learned counsel for the State has no objection of aforesaid arguments of learned counsel for the applicants.

¶10

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing and staying the further proceedings of the aforesaid case is dismissed as not pressed.

¶11

However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the limited prayer of learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that if the accused-applicants surrender before the trial court and apply for bail within three weeks from

¶12

today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Till the aforesaid period, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶13

It it clarified that if the accused-applicants do not appear before the court concerned by the said date, the court concerned shall proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶14

The present application is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 24.3.2023 M. ARIF

¶16

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramvilas and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramvilas and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navneet Tomar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kailash and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mehilal and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjeet Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atmaram Yadav@ Atmaram and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohit Jaiswal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another